Scrutinizing Strains with Science : An Objective Discussion

[Only Ornamental]

Why not start a new thread on cacti? Cause we're quite OT LoL...
'Peruvian type'? Peru and Bolivia share the highest biodiversity when it comes to cacti .
Also, peyote is extinct in many of his original habitats (got eaten by hippies).
They are often burrowed deeply and just the flat tip shows covered half in sand and dust. Very easy to overlook, because a ten year old specimen may have only the size of a thumbnail (as said, the bigger ones got too often found already).

 

[pinkus]

Also, peyote is extinct in many of his original habitats (got eaten by hippies).

Very true, however as you say they aren't obvious, at least not unless they are flowering. I'm very lucky in that the land I get to go to is part of huge nature conservancy tract along the Devil's River. It's there I'm sure. It's not inviting land if you aren't prepared. I'm actually looking for seed to pop so I can reintroduce it just in case. This land is filled with crazy alkaloid containing plants like angel's trumpets (datura) and a bunch of acacias.

Here's a bit on Black Bush: Acacia rigidula – This species, which is heavily defended with long spines, is notable because it has been reported by Clement et al. (1997) to contain an astonishing 44 alkaloids and amines. Most of the isolated alkaloids are biologically active phenethylamines and tryptamines, and interestingly tropane alkaloids such as nicotine were also reported for the first time in the Leguminoseae family. The main alkaloids were determined to be N-methyl-beta-phenethylamine, tyramine, N-methyltyramine and hordenine, in agreement with previous studies. Both Acacia rigidula and the related species Acacia berlandieri cause a locomotor ataxia known as “limber limb” when grazed on by sheep, a condition similar to Phalaris staggers that also affect sheep. Other alkaloids and amines in A. rigidula include phenethylamine and 29 derivatives of phenethylamine (including trace amounts of mescaline and numerous related psychedelic phenethylamines), amphetamine, methamphetamine, dopamine, tryptamine, NMT, DMT and nicotine.

BTW, I'm steering clear of Black Bush.

My cacti are all San Pedro, Peruvian torch or hybrids. I had a Juul's Giant, but it's gone now. Peyote needs to regroup and regrow... the cactus portion of my mission here is to spread the word, Save the Peyote. I'm looking for an achuma, or more correctly Trichocereus Bridgesii.

 

[pinkus]

I just thought I'd post this for anyone still moving along these lines:
DIY TLC plates at pennies on the dollar compared to manufactured.
[YOUTUBEIF]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNDQkM3jasA[/YOUTUBEIF]

Stay safe

 

[pinkus]

well that didn't work

just google "home scientist 024"

 

[G.O. Joe]

Does this homemade TLC involve cannabis? Homemade slides are easy to make, but good slides are not made with ease. The cannabinoid acids separate well from non-acidic things of course, but the neutral cannabinoids do not separate from each other easily.

If hexane by itself can be used, it hasn't been published - a little ether or ethyl acetate would usually be added. Solvent pairs are almost always used in TLC. There is a published and confirmed method using only toluene, that would be quite convenient, except for the silver nitrate.
http://books.google.com/books?id=8JsQgRO3QcwC&pg=PA56

 

[Only Ornamental]

And toluene is a bitch on TLC... slow migration and evaporation, as well as eventual side-reactions with the developer.
Way easier to go with the common solvent pairs you proposed. Also, the proportions may slightly change with regard to the used plate type and alike and usually have to be adjusted a bit.
I also propose to decarboxylate prior to the TLC, else to add a little bit (~1%) of acetic or formic acid if a clean migration and neat separation of the acids is envisaged.

 

[pinkus]

Methanol and ether are supposed to work well. I just ran across the video series and figured I'd post, even if it's just as a place to find suppliers. The "home scientist" does have lots nice of little tips.

I did get a kit through sirchie but haven't run any plates yet.

I won't be taking any organic chem locally because there is a waiting list and I'd have to jump through the hoops of some degree plan to get in. Think I'll look for grad student tutors who like weed... shouldn't be toooo hard to find. Or maybe I'll just make the cheap plates and give it a shot. They use plaster of paris and alumina on lab slides BTW.

 

[Donn]

So just to be clear, you have no interest in knowing which Cannabinoids and which terpenes at what %'s you prefer or dislike?
It seems the info would help you find new varieties you like if they were also tested for Cannabinoids and terpenes before you even bought them?
And while every smoker may prefer different effects or tastes, the "quantifying the quality of herb in a lab" can be done, and will be the future. Why should GC/MS data be damned? Isn't it better to use every tool, be it a lab or mans taste, smell, and experience. Together they are both stronger.

That was a couple years ago, but I've just read through this thread for the first time (and not the last - will take a couple readings to absorb everything!) One of the things that has changed since then is there are now several legal states, including mine, where it is an above-ground world that could go in a lot of new directions.

Another new thing is the Steep Hill Lab Strain Fingerprint.

What do you all think about that? It's just what Sam is talking about there -- but then at another point in this long past discussion, there's also some recognition that these factors will depend maybe significantly on growing conditions, harvest time, and maybe more.

So for me, we could look at this kind of like wine - like, maybe a pinot noir would be better with tonight's dinner than a merlot, but if you really wanted to get down to it, you may have gone shopping for a particular year from a particular vineyard. I can get Durban Poison for example from a couple growers. I'm sorry to say I haven't already done this and can say positively that they're different, but even if they aren't, there is sure the potential that someone could get the right seeds and grow and harvest them right, and end up with something distinctly different. Different, say, from someone who's growing for yield.

So that's question #1 - reality check - is that true? Or can we expect the Durban Poison variety to come through close enough to type regardless, that it's going to match the "fingerprint" close enough that no one really cares about the difference? That's sure the face Steep Hill and Leafly are putting on it, and it's how the growers and retailers have been selling it.

Question #2 is whether this is the right data? or are we missing some terpenes or something that are widely enough thought to matter? let's say psychoactively, though I guess there's no real good reason to exclude other health issues that might be of note. SC Labs tests for 31 terpenes, they say; Werc Shop looks like 10.

Question #3 probably should be "what other question should I be asking?" Clearly ... to return to the wine analogy, no one tests wine like that, they just drink it. That goes to the conversation I quoted - why not just smoke the stuff and find out? But keep track of your impressions, share them with others, etc? I've read plenty of that, and I'm not impressed by the potential. Same with wine reviews, really, but in that world is built on generations of experience. I'd like to see us build reasonably quickly towards an informed scene where a grower can really earn a reputation for providing a product that meets fairly sophisticated consumer demand, and good test signatures seems like a great tool to educate consumers. So any insights are welcome!

 

[Bubbleblower]

this analysis is now available to everyone in legal areas, not just govt mandated tests. We can finally start seeing what makes the best strains so good, and determine what is there

Where on the internet can we find reliable analyses published?

One thing I have been able to analyse is what makes GG#4 and GSC so good is the very high amount of humulene in it and also they were much better untill they got hyped.

While I was typing people already started answering my question, that's great

 

[Siskiyou Sam]

The strain fingerprint at steep hill is helpfull and Analitical 360 is providing real time and SC labs has a better search interface.
Here is a terp test on one of my own strains. Now that terpene testing is readily available in at least 4 states, we should not only be able to pick out the terpene profiles that we most enjoy or are the most effective medicine, but figure out how nutrients and conditions affect terpene and cannabinoid expression.

 

[Donn]

I like the terpenoids profile on your test. It isn't as simplified as the Steep Hill fingerprint, but if you had a couple strains side by side, you could still see at a glance what you're getting, and if it turns out everyone wants to know about humulene or something, you don't have to come up with a new one - it's all there. Pretty much, anyway, assuming we factor in another analysis for THCV, CBN etc. Maybe this information is really going to be most interesting to a small minority who really "geeks out" on this stuff, so it's OK if it takes a little study to use it.

 

[Donn]

Analytical 360, though ... something's wrong here? Just at a semi-random survey, it seems to be a general rule that they detect no limonene in their samples, in strains where I'd have expected plenty of it. They always find myrcine, caryophyllene, maybe humulene, but rarely limonene, alpha-pinene, linalool. I don't trust this.

The tests I looked at, at SC Labs, omit terpenes, and the cannabinoid tests seem a little skimpy. I guess there isn't a consensus about what levels of THCV, CBL mean, but I'd want them on the report until it's really clear that they don't mean anything.

 

[Siskiyou Sam]

The deal with SC lab is you need to sort the data by selecting "terpene" from the left menu of the "tested" page.
As time goes on, IMO terpene content by weight and later kind will be added to the label. That small minority may just develop into market demand when consumers realize it's the terpene content and ratios that will determine the difference between stimulant herb and sedative herb.

 

[Donn]

OK, got it! The SC labs terpine test results are great, very detailed. It's interesting to look for similarities between the same strains tested here and by Steep Hills - not a "fingerprint" match, by any stretch of the imagination, but at least more than coincidentally similar. Have to watch the scaling - they scale to the highest value, so if something for example has 11 mg/g beta caryophyllene, that's going to make 5 mg/g myrcene look small, where the same 5 mg/g myrcene could be the full width of the diagram on another sample. So that slightly confounds comparisons, otherwise it's a nice presentation.

Labeling would be great, but ... needs more study. Maybe each package comes with a little pamphlet with test analysis, strain history, grower's notes about the season, curing, etc. No kidding, why not? But you could do something on the envelope of a 1 gram package, if that's all you have to work with. That strain fingerprint, maybe, though not a good name for it if it comes up visibly different depending on the grower, year etc.

 

[CannaBrix]

Question #3 probably should be "what other question should I be asking?" Clearly ... to return to the wine analogy, no one tests wine like that, they just drink it. That goes to the conversation I quoted - why not just smoke the stuff and find out?

Ahhhh or does everybody 'just drink it'?

Or do the winemakers test brix, and various other components of wine at different stages?

So how do they know when it is done?

The analogy can be spun, and I understand that, to say the wine-making is like the growing and that is why wine-makers test.

But this is new ground. Cannabis has so many different cannabinoids, terpenes, flavinoids, etc. that maybe there is a reason to do the testing.

I agree that the test is a tool, to help us move towards a standard, and I also agree that the matter is at some point subjective, that there is no standard for the 'best bud ever'.

What is happening now at dispensaries and compassion centers is the focus on THC and CBD. Not enough is known of how each and every component of cannabis, and its ingestion, effects each other for these tests to be a standard. Yet, this doesn't mean those numbers don't mean anything.

 

[Siskiyou Sam]

For sure and one major difference between wine grape vines and cannabis plants is simply wine grapes are propagated asexualy from old famous vines. Cannabis being a dioecious annual is probably the most outbred, hybridised plants on the planet.
I'm reading up on the synergistic effect of specific terpenes on the body, mind, THC uptake, memory and the like. We probably shouldn't care if the THC is 15% or 20% But we do want high Limonene in the morning and Mycerene and Linalool at night before bed.

 

[Donn]

But this is new ground. Cannabis has so many different cannabinoids, terpenes, flavinoids, etc. that maybe there is a reason to do the testing.

Right, no maybe about it. One of the problems with the wine analogy is that human taste/smell discrimination is very good, closely tied to memory, etc. Wine makers may use testing in their craft, but consumers don't need it - taste is objective fact. Experience with psychoactive drugs though is so ambiguous, so tied to environment and circumstances, so hard to observe in an objective way, so hard to talk about, that some very objective data to tie it to is a real blessing.

 

[MrBelvedere]

For now the "fingerprint" term is a misnomer... Would call it signature like Donn said or simply a profile instead. SC and SHL are interchanging the name of famous clone onlys and strains. For example chemdog 4 and ACDC are clone only, Durban Poison is a general seed line strain. It seems they are profiling based on terpene and cannaboid levels. They did not publish what window of tolerance they have for the levels to establish a "fingerprint". The term "match" should not be used unless comparing DNA diff. If the tested plant is a clone of another (grown/harvested/tested identically) then you would hope/expect the profiled levels to have similar levels within a window of tolerance for there to be a mistermed "match" between clones. For plants that are named after general seed line strains hopefully we can use this technology to see what if any levels/ratios "breed true" for any/all of these levels? They are not using dna at all in the tests, they are testing using only GC for these levels? What levels/ratios are most likely to change the most due to environmental factors? I think analysis of thousands of samples may answer this question For example we could find that limonene is very susceptible to change due to environment... and CBD is not as susceptible.

I have the same color skin color, hair, and eyes as my sibling, everything else is completely different between us? Everybody, Team Delta9, et al loves the plant because they can. Every plant submitted must have a Social Security Number or GUID going forward.

 

[Donn]

I'm new to this stuff, but I'd put SC and Steep Hill in different categories. I mean, the idea behind the Steep Hill "fingerprint" is that they're going to get these markers for Durban Poison, and that's that - now we all know what we're getting, if the package says "Durban Poison." For that, they deserve your criticism about genetic identity of what they're testing, and maybe more criticism on top of that, though at least they're doing something.

I didn't notice though that SC is playing that game at all - they put whatever name you gave them on the sample results - and the source - and I imagine they'll publish every Durban Poison test they do. (I don't see many duplicates so far, but the two "Tangie" results are kind of interesting - more similar profile than I would have bet, but different amounts and with some extra terpenes in one that don't appear in the other, terpinolene and guaiol.) I don't see them putting themselves in the business of strain analysis, it's just samples. Which they then publish, and obsessives like me thumb through them and try to learn something, but the real point of the tests - in my ideal world anyway - is to carry that information to the consumer of that crop.

For me, consumers and breeders may have different interests here? I already can't keep track of the strains out there, and when I walk into the retail shop I need to be able to make do with what they have that day. If I can talk to them in terms of an analysis profile, and they know their products in those terms, then it practically doesn't matter what strains - that's the growers' business. So I'd attach the SC tests to the retail packaging, and your genetic trait fingerprinting would be for some breeder resource library.

(Except, I'd want the more comprehensive cannabinoid info that Steep Hill publishes. Don't know why SC leaves that out of their "active cannabinoids" report - THCV, CBG ... are we really sure they aren't active in some way?)

 

[Donn]

But we do want high Limonene in the morning and Mycerene and Linalool at night before bed.

Not to change the subject, but ... apparently a 6oz glass of orange juice has 5mg of limonene. It really comes from the rind, so it all depends on how juice got squeezed out, how long it sat around, etc., but it looks to me like an order of magnitude more than you'd ever get in a dose of cannabis. If it doesn't matter how it gets into the system, would some juice or a couple kumquats make the weed limonene irrelevant?